New US Postal Service Ad Campaign: Email Sucks, So Mail Stuff Instead
Access To Italian Wikipedia Blocked In Protest Of Wiretapping Bill In Italy [Updated]

France Continues Mass Processing Of Infringement Accusations: 60 People Get Third Strike Notice… 650,000 Get First Strike

Copyright

from the crimininalizing-an-entire-country dept

Wed, Oct 5th 2011 09:16am -

The latest stats coming out of France’s HADOPI “three strikes” (really three accusations) policy are really quite stunning. Most of the focus is on the fact that 60 ISP account holders have received their third strike, and now await to see if they’ll be fined and/or kicked off the internet without ever having actually been convicted of copyright infringement. But, to me, the much more interesting numbers are the first and second strike numbers. An astounding 650,000 people have received “first strike” notices, with 44,000 of those receiving a second strike as well. Those are huge numbers. It makes you wonder, at what point do those in power begin to recognize that if so many people are engaging in this, there must be some sort of better solution.

The entertainment industry loves to call infringement “theft,” but I don’t think anyone would argue that 650,000 people are running around France stealing things out of stores. And that’s because people inherently recognize that there’s a massive difference between stealing a physical product, such that there’s one less of it, and listening to a song that they like, where nothing is removed for anyone else. When a huge percentage of your population is accused of breaking the law, the problem is not with the people… but with the law.

Filed Under: , ,

228 CommentsLeave a Comment
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “France Continues Mass Processing Of Infringement Accusations: 60 People Get Third Strike Notice… 650,000 Get First Strike”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
228 Comments
Anonymous Coward says:

France has the right idea but they aren’t taking it far enough. Theft cannot go unpunished. I don’t know why you don’t see that if something doesn’t belong to you and you take it without any permission then it is theft. You’re just a snotty, entitled freetard who thinks the world was created for you.

France has taken a HUGE step towards taming the internet wild west. Soon there will be 650,000 seeding torrents and uploading infringing content. That will put quite a damper on your community. The party is over, Mike. You, the Tims, and most of the other people on this site are going to realize that someday soon, and I hope it isn’t too late to save you from jail time.

Chronno S. Trigger (profile) says:

Re: Re:

“And that’s because people inherently recognize that there’s a massive difference between stealing a physical product… and listening to a song that they like”

“Most people” you mean.

Most people also understand the concept of justice; as in not being punished for things you haven’t been found guilty for.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“And that’s because people inherently recognize that there’s a massive difference between stealing a physical product… and listening to a song that they like”

“Most people” you mean.

Most people also understand the concept of justice; as in not being punished for things you haven’t been found guilty for.

And “most” people understand that it’s wrong to get something of value without compensating its rightful owner.

Mike42 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

And most people would agree that the “rightful” owner is the artist who created the work. We can also agree that the rightful owner rarely sees any of the money which does get paid, thereby significantly reducing the moralistic stance of the “legal” owners.

Most people would also agree that taking, copying, and sharing are 3 different words which mean 3 different things.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

And most people would agree that the “rightful” owner is the artist who created the work. We can also agree that the rightful owner rarely sees any of the money which does get paid, thereby significantly reducing the moralistic stance of the “legal” owners.

Artists do receive residuals and royalties. Are you suggesting that stealing from one group instead of another is justifiable?

Most people would also agree that taking, copying, and sharing are 3 different words which mean 3 different things.

The net effect is that the taker ends up getting something of value without compensation the rightful owner. That’s not OK where I come from.

CHRoNoSS says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

SO your ok with tool makers and factory works making your cars and homes getting the same rights to every use of the things they make….WHY NOT EH? lets make everything so expensive that a person sites on a floor naked ina room with nothing …cause that’s where this leads.

Everytime you use a door , that’l be a buck, everytime you flip a switch for power that electrician needs residuals too.
every time you use that car you no longer own but have TOS to USE well theres a buck , and if you stay in your hosue were going to throttle you form 4pm to 2am in morning so you cna only use 5% of your house to prevent you over using your house.. ALSO baseball batts and hockey sticks now have SPORTSRIGHTS and every time you want ot use one you have to pay 50$…YUP I can really see profit here until everyone has the same rights.

BASICALLY we the people are being discriminated by the actors and musicians and labels and are being treated like the blacks of the 60’s.
THE riaa and mpaa and bsa are racist discriminating bastards. UNTIL i see everyone have the same rights we are not equal under the law which btw in both the usa and Canada says we should have equality.

Josh in CharlotteNC (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Artists do receive residuals and royalties.

Only when they’re “recouped” – which we all know with RIAA/MPAA accounting practices, is somewhere between heat-death-of-the-universe and never.

Are you suggesting that stealing from one group instead of another is justifiable?

Question – how do you justify stealing from the public when previously public domain content is forced back under copyright?

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Are you suggesting that stealing from one group instead of another is justifiable?

Heck, I don’t even agree that it’s stealing. It’s infringement. And no, I don’t agree that infringement is justifiable.

The net effect is that the taker ends up getting something of value without compensation the rightful owner. That’s not OK where I come from.

I also don’t agree with this sentiment. It’s not automatically wrong to enjoy something without compensating the rightful owner. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying looking at a nice painting without paying the painting’s owner. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a beautiful landscape without paying the property owner. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying the smell of baking cookies without paying the baker.

In all of these cases, the owner was not deprived of anything, so my enjoyment caused them no harm. Therefore, there’s nothing wrong with enjoying them.

Again, sadly, I must reiterate that I do think there’s something wrong with copyright infringement, I just don’t get there by your rationale. I equally think that infringement is not theft, and to equate the two is very wrong. I also think that copyright as it exists now is abused to deprive people of legitimate non-infringing uses of copyrighted works, and this just as wrong as copyright infringement.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Re:

I also don’t agree with this sentiment. It’s not automatically wrong to enjoy something without compensating the rightful owner. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying looking at a nice painting without paying the painting’s owner.

So you sneak into the gallery without paying admission?

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a beautiful landscape without paying the property owner.

Not if you hop the fence at the topiary garden rather than paying for admittance.

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying the smell of baking cookies without paying the baker.

So watch the free trailer or read the review.

In all of these cases, the owner was not deprived of anything, so my enjoyment caused them no harm. Therefore, there’s nothing wrong with enjoying them.

You ignore the point that all of these experiences are at times offered by the owner or rightsholder in exchange for money. Quite simply, you just don’t want to pay. That’s called freeloading.

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:5 Re:

So you sneak into the gallery without paying admission?

Where did I mention galleries?

Not if you hop the fence at the topiary garden rather than paying for admittance.

Where did I mention trespassing?

So watch the free trailer or read the review.

Huh? I think you suffered analogy failure, unless you’re asserting that the smell of baking is nothing but a “preview” of the baked good, in which case I disagree.

You ignore the point that all of these experiences are at times offered by the owner or rightsholder in exchange for money.

Interesting. You bring in a bunch of nonsequitors in reply to my comments and then accuse me of ignoring them. My apologies, my psychic powers must have failed me.

Besides, your point here is beside the point. I was merely arguing against your unqualified assertion that it’s automatically wrong to enjoy something without compensating the rightful owner, something that your reply does not counter-argue.

For the record, I do agree with some of the things you’ve said here. Trespassing, for instance, is wrong.

Quite simply, you just don’t want to pay.

Now there’s the biggest nonsequitor you’ve said yet, since nothing that I’ve said even starts down the road of whether or not I want to pay. We were talking ethics. For the record, I often — a couple times a week, usually — pay for things that I could get (legally) for free because I like to support people making things that I enjoy.

What’s the opposite of freeloader?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Re:

@Fenderson

John you sound too smart to act this stupid. My point is that while it’s possible to enjoy free stuff (ie Sita Sings The Blues– though I don’t know if enjoy is the word), there a big difference when that stuff is only offered for money by the rightful owner and you still feel free to take it without compensation.

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Re:

You’re right, there is a big difference between what you said before and what you are saying now.

“The net effect is that the taker ends up getting something of value without compensation the rightful owner.”

vs

“that stuff is only offered for money by the rightful owner and you still feel free to take it without compensation.”

It’s a subtle difference but, as you point out, important.

Chris Rhodes (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

And “most” people understand that it’s wrong to get something of value without compensating its rightful owner.

You may as well accuse people of “oxygen piracy” because they don’t compensate tree farm companies, and therefore “get something of value without compensating its rightful owner”. For that train of logic to go anywhere, you would first have to convince them that the air they breathe is “rightfully owned” by the company in question.

Likewise, before you can claim that downloading a song is wrong, you’d first have to convince people that a songwriter is the “rightful owner” of a pattern of bits on their hard drive. Good luck with that.

Steve R. (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Who Establishes Ownerhip?

AC: Wrote “And “most” people understand that it’s wrong to get something of value without compensating its rightful owner.”The problem is that the content industry is claiming ownership privileges out of thin air. For example, if I take a paper book to Europe, I can still read it. I take a DVD to Europe, I can’t play it because of regional encoding. I assert that it is the content industry that is doing the “stealing”.

Unfortunately, the content industry can hire the lawyers and public relations people to create the image in the public’s mind that it is the public doing the “stealing” based on a property right made out of thin air. Content producers should not have the ability to “make law”.

Jeffrey Nonken (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Who Establishes Ownerhip?

I take a DVD to Europe, I can’t play it because of regional encoding.

Yep, but even worse. I’ve told this story here before but I think it’s worth repeating. I have a 20yo movie on Laserdisc, but no working player. I wanted to show it to a friend. Turns out I can get it on VHS or region 2 DVD (I live in region 1). Nobody ever made a region 1 DVD.

I sure as heck didn’t want to buy an inferior quality VHS tape, especially since there was a good chance it was old stock and might have deteriorated to unplayability.

How is it benefiting anybody for me not to be able to buy a DVD of a 20yo movie? How does it fail to compensate the “rightful owner” if I buy an out-of-region DVD? How does it compensate the “rightful owner” if I don’t buy it because I can’t play it?

My solution was to buy the region 2 DVD, use up one of the region changes on an old DVD burner, rip it and play it back on my computer. Worked a treat.

Of course what I did was illegal. By ripping it to my computer I defeated the copy protection and STOLE A COPY THAT I WAS NOT ENTITLED TO. The movie company is now out thousands of dollars due to my selfish act of piracy and theft.

Right?

Yeah. This is the preposterous end result of the MPAA’s obsessive need to control every single jot and tittle of distributing their content. People cannot get what they want even when they’re willing to pay extra for it, and everybody loses.

One of these days I’ll pick up another laserdisc player and transfer all my content to DVD. Another act of piracy! In fact, dozens! Because I only paid for that content once! But there’s no copy protection to defeat so it’s probably legal. This week. But think of the millions the studios will be out!

(Oh, and I’m probably also guilty of failure to pay thousands in public performance fees because I showed it to somebody else. At home, true, but he’s a “member of the public”. And besides, he paid for the pizza, so I guess that means I charged him admission.)

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Who Establishes Ownerhip?

I believe that every time I bring up region coding, the response is somewhere between “buy what we offer you an nothing else”, and “you’re a dirty pirate is you crack CSS/import legally”. Oh, and a quick word: VLC. If you have a DVD that’s region locked, try that to play it on your computer without having to jump through the “you can only change the drive’s region X times” hoop. Saved a lot of tourists from Australia buying DVDs on vacation over here, I can tell you.

I swear that half of the industry’s problems could be overcome by simply offering product region free. Then again, I don’t know the title you were trying to get. Maybe I could suggest something, especially if it’s more of a cult item? Anyway, I know for a fact that I’ve imported many films that are region 1 only, and most people wouldn’t bother with the difficulty and expense.

But, of course, we’re “stealing” if we download a movie that’s not legally available to us. Which makes as much sense as me “stealing” by sitting here watching UK Channel 4 through my satellite box in Spain (I didn’t pay for the channel, as I wasn’t asked to).

pixelpusher220 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Most people would understand it’s wrong to deprive someone of something. With music downloads there is no such deprivation happening.

Digital copies are literally free and infinite so nothing has been lost by the creator.

Unless of course he was trying to make a living selling something that is now cost free and infinite in abundance. That’s going to be hard to do…

However, the power of the internet can seriously INCREASE the exposure of the artist and thus gain more money through other avenues.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

it’s wrong to get something of value without compensating its rightful owner.

I see – so how much are the cheques you write to Google each time you do a web search? And to the producers of the various TV programs you watch? And to the musicians for each of the songs you listen to on the radio?

After all, you wouldn’t be one of them “freetards” who gets something of value without paying its rightful owner, would you?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

“And “most” people understand that it’s wrong to get something of value without compensating its rightful owner.”

The air you breath is valuable, yet you are compensating no one.

Who is the rightful owner of something? Just because you dug a hole at the beach and someone stepped over it doesn’t make the digger a rightful owner.

There is nothing wrong with copying each other. Animals copy one another all the time. No one is the ‘rightful owner’ of a monopoly privilege. No one is entitled to a monopoly. Property laws aren’t about ‘rightful owners’ and they shouldn’t exist for that reason. As Thomas Jefferson notes, everyone rightfully owns everything equally. We have property laws to serve the public interest. IP laws aren’t about ‘compensating the rightful owners’ they’re about ‘promoting the progress’. They don’t exist because it is somehow wrong not to compensate the ‘rightful owner’ they exist only to promote the progress. If that’s not what they’re doing, if that’s not their intent, then I say we abolish them. If you don’t like it, then no one is forcing you to produce stuff and publicly release it. If you don’t want people copying you, then don’t publicly release anything. Others will innovate perfectly fine without you and they’ll innovate perfectly fine without unninnovative and litigious lawyers.

Just because some corrupt government claims that someone is the ‘rightful owner’ of something doesn’t make it true. What gives the government that discretion?

Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Yes, yes. We all know that France has been after Tims for many years. Ever heard of a frenchman named Tim? Hell no you haven’t.

That’s because while the Nazis were doing their thing, the French silently rounded up every Tim within their borders and forced them to listen to French Rap Music until they bled out through their ears. Us chosen Tims refer to that as the HoloTim.

NEVER AGAIN, FRENCHIES!

nasch (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

I give it a 9! Very entertaining, plus look how effective. I thought it was pretty clearly not someone who believes all this stuff because of the overcrowding of copytard buzz phrases:

– infringement = theft
– entitled freetard
– taming the internet wild west
– enforcement is going to work this time
– the party is over

Combining all those in one post and fooling a substantial number of people into thinking you’re serious? Amazing! I can’t believe you would give it only a 4. :-p

Squirrel Brains (profile) says:

Re: Re:

First of all, it is not theft because by taking it, it does not deprive you of it. It might deprive you of some income, but that is speculative at best and is not related to that actual property you are accusing these people form taking.

Now, just sit back and think about what you are advocating. You are going to piss off a lot of people. Because Intellectual Property is a legal fiction (could be called part of a societal contract), if you piss off enough people, society can take it away from you. 650,000 people who have been accused , some based on faulty data, and not convicted, can start to cause a stink.

Long story short, if you want to keep your precious intellectual property “rights,” you better not piss too many people off. In fact, the fact that 650,000 people are not respecting those rights might be a sign that they are already slipping through your fingers.

Robert says:

Re: Re: Re:

650,000 people on first strike, lets bet these people will vote against Scarsleezy the scum bag who wrote the law for sexual favours from his media hungry wife. I forecast that when he loses office, pretty much a certainty, he will also lose his media hungry wife.
That’s what it really boils down to, stick it to enough people and you will lose at the next election, the incoming politician takes notice and changes the law guaranteeing re-election.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Haha, you caught on to what the TD staff is trying to do. They have woken up and realizes there is about 10 – 15 ACs right now actively posting, and they want to “sort us out” so they can play the game of trying to discredit us by name.

Sorry, not falling for it.

In the meantime, you guys got punk’d by staff. Don’t you feel stupid?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Seriously. I always try to come here and defend all that is good with the world against the evil of Blackbeard Mike and his Timcorsairs. But it is time to make a stand and tame the wild seas. PirateDirt thinks they can shove his infringement cannonballs and sink the boat of HADOPI. But we will sail forth, we will bury him like a sunken treasure, with our mighty Three Strikes, made by the sabre of the fine RIAA Navy.

Chronno S. Trigger (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Why would they need to “sort you out”? They have your IP addresses already; they can, if they wanted to, track your asses. You give no evidence that this particular AC is a staffer. You make the same mistake as France does, you accuse and attempt to punish without conviction (or even evidence).

Even you admit that there are several ACs that post here, why are you so sure there isn’t a new one? Why would you want to take credit away from where it’s due?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

Not staff buddy. Just trying to get all of that out of the way so that a normal discussion can commence. Fairly regular troll trying out a new trolling style. I didn’t like how it came out, so I’ll go back to my old ways of doing things.

In response to whomever said something about ‘broad brush’: I knew I forgot one. I’ll get it right next time.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re:

> I hope it isn’t too late to save you from jail time.

Even if you don’t agree with Mike, what the hell do you think he’s done that would warrant prison?

Mike doesn’t host or even link to infringing content. He writes a blog which is critical of IP maximalism. Are you seriously suggesting that even speaking out against such things needs to be criminalized?

Let’s see if you have the balls to respond.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

> I hope it isn’t too late to save you from jail time.

Even if you don’t agree with Mike, what the hell do you think he’s done that would warrant prison?

Mike doesn’t host or even link to infringing content. He writes a blog which is critical of IP maximalism. Are you seriously suggesting that even speaking out against such things needs to be criminalized?

Let’s see if you have the balls to respond.

God you’re a chump. you’re getting played simpleton.

Hephaestus (profile) says:

They hide from public scrutiny when they push to pass these laws and agreements, not thinking that when they are implemented, they will shine a huge light on themselves and what they have done. Extending the length of copyright did not attract public attention, it did not affect the average person. HADOPI however, is now affecting people, and will start a public conversation in france about copyright. With the 6 strike ISP agreements in the US, and the signing of ACTA they are about to attract a lot of unwanted attention.

The end result IMHO will be public scrutiny of both copyright and the patent system.

Hephaestus (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

In case you hadn’t realized, people are beginning to take notice of the wrongs being done by governments and corporations. They are actively getting organized and pushing back. I predicted last year the pirate party in germany, will be at 9% of the voting population in germany by february of 2012. It is now at 8% and growing. Sweden is roughly the same. In the US the Tea party has shown up against business as usual. All the trends show that this pushing back will continue to grow.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

In case you hadn’t realized, people are beginning to take notice of the wrongs being done by governments and corporations. They are actively getting organized and pushing back. I predicted last year the pirate party in germany, will be at 9% of the voting population in germany by february of 2012. It is now at 8% and growing. Sweden is roughly the same. In the US the Tea party has shown up against business as usual. All the trends show that this pushing back will continue to grow.

Why don’t you able on down to Wall Street and block the Brooklyn Bridge. Just make sure to wear a “Techdirtbag” t-shirt so I can tell who the guy in the video is who gets maced and is screaming and crying like a little bitch.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

In case you hadn’t realized, people are beginning to take notice of the wrongs being done by governments and corporations. They are actively getting organized and pushing back. I predicted last year the pirate party in germany, will be at 9% of the voting population in germany by february of 2012. It is now at 8% and growing. Sweden is roughly the same. In the US the Tea party has shown up against business as usual. All the trends show that this pushing back will continue to grow.

Why don’t you amble on down to Wall Street and block the Brooklyn Bridge. Just make sure to wear a “Techdirtbag” t-shirt so I can tell who the guy in the video is who gets maced and is screaming and crying like a little bitch.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

You and your false statistics numbers LoL

The industry was complaining that they send out millions of complaints and the French government only took care of a small fraction of it.

Not to mention the government is afraid of really doing its job, because if it did, you would see the fantastic backlash that it would cause.

Now can you explain why the French actually are competing in forums all over there to see who can defeat the system?

DH's Love Child (profile) says:

Re: Re:

So let’s extrapoalte this…

According to the US census, the population of the US is 312,363,265. So if a mere 1% of the US population was guilty that would be 3.12 million people.

And also according to the census, in 2009, the last year in which crime statistics were available, the total number of reported crimes (Violent and non-violent/property) in the US was 3.466 million.

So you’re telling me that a law which doubles the crime rate of a country is working?

I’m sorry, I don’t get it.

Dave (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Ok. Population of France: 62,616,488. Of those, about 69.3% have internet access, so 43,393,226 have internet access. But they don’t all have their own internet accounts, so if you figure one account per family, or 2.5 people, then we have 17,357,290. Of those, 650,000 just got their notices which represents approximately 3.7% of people on the internet.

Look at it another way, their may have only been 650,000 notices (only! HA!), but 1,625,000 people just had their access threatened. Did you think this was magically targeting just the member of the house that infringed?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_ave_siz_of_hou-people-average-size-of-households

http://www.internetworldstats.com/top25.htm

Someantimalwareguy (profile) says:

Two words that should sum up this idiocy...

…Volstead Act.

If you can’t see the parallels here, I suggest you brush up on your US history (circa 1920-1933) to get a grasp of how this issue is likely to end eventually.

When the population gives no credence to the law, it breads contempt for the law and that is bad no matter what side of the issue you are on…

Jeffrey Nonken (profile) says:

Re: Re: Two words that should sum up this idiocy...

Prohibition was classic Ken Burns. Quality stuff.

I’ve got a copy of his piece on the Shakers, but I haven’t seen Prohibition. I guess I should bittorrent a copy from the Pirate Bay and watch it!

*runs away very fast*

(Seriously, now you have me interested. Looks like it’s available from Amazon…)

Joe Publius (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Two words that should sum up this idiocy...

What I find even more telling is that as was mentioned by Someantimalwareguy, the legal progression of IP is starting to follow an oddly similar legal arc to Prohibition. Attempts to strictly legislate an activity that has strong cultural roots, and is fairly natural to boot, leading to a significant population who doesn’t see the point in the law, and breaks it at nearly every opportunity, many times out of habit, but also out of sheer contrariness.

Anonymous Coward says:

When a huge percentage of your population is accused of breaking the law, the problem is not with the people… but with the law.

Right. So you really don’t think “piracy is not OK.” You really think that the law is not OK. Piracy, though, is just fine and dandy. Right, Pirate Mike?

C’mon. Get out of the pirate closet. It’s OK to admit it: You don’t think “piracy is not OK.”

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

I do too. But if you create a system where the crime is easy to commit, and the costs to prove it too high, you have essentially wiped the crime off the books. This system replies to crime at the same speed it occurs. I know that Pirate Mike hates it, but hey, that is how things work out.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Re:

Captain Mike Morgan just wants us to believe that he can legalize piracy, like the Letters of Marquee of yore. He’s becoming a privateer for FUDland, and like those before him, wants to plunders France’s booty. But he will shiver his timbers when he encounters the powerful… uh, cannons of ProtectIP and he will find that they will strike (three times) directly at his gunpowder… shed.. thingy, blowing his crew of unrepentant plunderers sky high.

JMT says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

“But if you create a system where the crime is easy to commit, and the costs to prove it too high, you have essentially wiped the crime off the books.”

You’re right! More accurately, the “crime” is something that a large (and increasing) number of people do not believe is inherently wrong. Technology has allowed us to circumvent the old gatekeepers and go back to doing what we’ve always done, the sharing of culture. By far the biggest deterrent to committing a crime is peoples’ own moral assessment of the act. It’s pretty clear from the ever-increasing rate of copyright infringement that it wasn’t so much that moral assessment that prevented “piracy”, it was the state of technology.

“This system replies to crime at the same speed it occurs.”

And it’s amazing that you can’t see anything wrong with that. Being considered innocent until proven guilty and having a chance to defend yourself in court are long-established standards in most of the world’s legal systems, and yet they’re being put aside at the behest of an industry that dramatically overrates their position in society.

Anonymous Coward says:

The entertainment industry loves to call infringement “theft,” but I don’t think anyone would argue that 650,000 people are running around France stealing things out of stores. And that’s because people inherently recognize that there’s a massive difference between stealing a physical product, such that there’s one less of it, and listening to a song that they like, where nothing is removed for anyone else. When a huge percentage of your population is accused of breaking the law, the problem is not with the people… but with the law.

This paragraph is why people characterize Masnick as a piracy apologist and supporter of infringing. Sleaze weasel.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

There’s only one troll calling him an apologist in the last few threads. It’s been you after people have shown you repeatedly that you’re lying out your ass. So there’s really no more of a point in talking to you since all you’re going to do is keep pulling up the same crap line about how Mike’s a pirate.

Jay- are you really so stupid that you don’t understand the difference between calling someone a pirate versus a piracy apologist.

apologist [əˈpɒlədʒɪst]
n
a person who offers a defence by argument

pi?rate   [pahy-ruht] Show IPA noun, verb, -rat?ed, -rat?ing.
noun

4. a person who uses or reproduces the work or invention of another without authorization.

It’s probably it bit too subtle for you, but a careful reading will show the terms are indeed a bit different.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

While I’m ashamed to admit I own several hundred of the damn shiny things, I’m willing to bet no French politician or their family members (Think of teenagers) will ever receive a notification. Or the same for a member of the “IAA” bunch.
I say this because I doubt very highly that they are all law abiding people.
So, to speak bluntly, this law is not going to be applied fairly or evenly. With that said, add to the fact that this law is enforced without investigation, I do feel that the French people should vote the weasels that enacted this law, out of office.
Yes, those that deserve to be paid should be. And enforcing a law on the people with out any effort of investigation is wrong.
While some of you cheer this as a step forward, I say to you that, this is the erosion of civil rights and should not be tolerated.
IP is supposed to be short term and for the benefit of society, not the wholesale branding thousands of people (Or innocent fax machines.) as criminals.
I’m damn glad I’m old. Hopefully I’ll pass before the “IAA” bunch actually have people dragged out of their homes for this crap.
There has to be a better way of dealing this an issue that simply isn’t going to go away, short of turning the world in to a police state.

out_of_the_blue says:

Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

So your assertion: “When a huge percentage of your population is accused of breaking the law, the problem is not with the people… but with the law.” is just plain wrong. You libertarians NEVER allow for bad actors in your “free markets”, are apparently ignorant of human nature. — And you excuse yourself for stealing.

Now, I make no bones about resisting increase of copyright because the content doesn’t deserve to be rewarded very highly, it’s JUST entertainment. That’s a nuanced position. But you freetards just want it all free.

Back to exact topic: your assertion from that “study” that 13 percent of those accused would continue was completely wrong, Mike. Only 6.8 percent brave it out to 2nd stage, a handful to 3rd.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

Back to exact topic: your assertion from that “study” that 13 percent of those accused would continue was completely wrong, Mike. Only 6.8 percent brave it out to 2nd stage, a handful to 3rd.

Boy, talk about an inconvenient truth. Sounds like the graduated response system in France is working pretty well. What say you pudgy?

Squirrel Brains (profile) says:

Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

Your reasoning does not flow. These are the complaints that have been processed so far. We don’t know how many people already have a 2nd warning in the queue or how many of these people have not be caught in the net yet. We don’t know how many of those 650,000 are false positives; people who were caught in the net but never actually infringed.

HuwOS (profile) says:

Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

Your position ootb is less nuanced and more deluded. You are in fact what you accuse everyone else of being; someone who believes that they have the right to decide what price or value should be applied to the work of other people.

The figures also don’t allow you to say that only 6.8 per cent brave it out to the second stage, you have absolutely no idea whether people if they were infringing when they received the first letter stopped or not. If they were infringing they now may be doing so in more difficult to identify ways. The only thing you can say is that fewer second strike letters have been sent, in itself it has no meaning, except presumably to the French post office.

out_of_the_blue says:

Re: Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

“Your position ootb is less nuanced and more deluded. You are in fact what you accuse everyone else of being; someone who believes that they have the right to decide what price or value should be applied to the work of other people.”

No, in short, there’s an objective basis to value. Food and water are of primary importance. You’re biased by having been born at a lucky time and place where you take the necessities and even luxuries for granted.

You decide every day what price you’ll pay others for every good that you buy: it’s called the market. God, it’s stupid to even try your line of argument.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

“You decide every day what price you’ll pay others for every good that you buy: it’s called the market. God, it’s stupid to even try your line of argument.
“

woooooooow he understands that the market chose te price, what a big step you have taken 🙂

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

“You decide every day what price you’ll pay others for every good that you buy: it’s called the market. “

Yep, and I quite often decide to pay $0 (without downloading a “freebie”). I often buy something else instead. Yet these idiots not only want to call me a pirate for doing so, but want me to have my internet connection removed based on zero evidence and zero due process.

Why is this not a problem to you?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Who says THEFT can't be POPULAR? Computers make it easy.

and we still don’t know if those are the exact numbers, and if the people that recived a first strike make some adjustments so it canot be traced again, as im thinking there are alot of varibables missing so there you go we still dont know a thing about whats oging on, but be sure that there will be a way to route aroudn i mean the need of some is what it gives a reason to invent and inovate 😛

anonymous says:

650,000 people may only be 1% of the population of France, but when so many get accused of the same thing at, basically, the same time, it definitely shows, as Mike says, there is something wrong with the law being applied! certainly as nothing has been removed, simply shared with others. i can see trouble ahead in a big, bad way, not only for France but for other countries as well. it wont be before time, either! no industry should be running any country, let alone the world!

Anonymous Coward says:

France has a population of over 62.8 million, which means 1.114% of the population has already been accused of breaking this law in a matter of what months?

The average household in France is probably somewhere between 2 to 3 people (from lots of singles living alone & low birthrate). So that means around 2.5% of the population would actually have their Internet shut down if they continue to get accused.

Now say that those #’s from the article are from just 1 year (I bet it’s from less then a year really), that would mean that in just 4 years TEN percent of the population will be accused of breaking this law, lots of them enough to be kicked off the Internet.

As a politician that’s unsustainable if 10% of your voters will be furious at you come reelection time in a few years over this law that the politician voted for. Worse yet, once 10% of your voters have been kicked off the Internet for fined for mere accusations, fear will spread among the other 90% of your voters that they’ll be next to get punished for mere accusations.

Sure they COULD change the law to require a trial over these accusations to try to slow down this rate, but do you have any idea how much money the court costs would eat up over something like this? The courts would be overwhelmed with new cases if even 10% of those accused fought it in court.

If I were a politician who voted for this bill I’d be scared to death at losing my job in half a decade over this law, unless of course I had a multimillion dollar job with the supporters of that law waiting for me when I was out of office.

out_of_the_blue says:

Are you petty censors still trying this childish "flag" crap?

There’s absolutely nothing objectionable about this:
—————————–
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click to show the comment.
Anonymous Coward, Oct 5th, 2011 @ 8:49am

France has the right idea but they aren’t taking it far enough. Theft cannot go unpunished. I don’t know why you don’t see that if something doesn’t belong to you and you take it without any permission then it is theft. You’re just a snotty, entitled freetard who thinks the world was created for you.

France has taken a HUGE step towards taming the internet wild west. Soon there will be 650,000 seeding torrents and uploading infringing content. That will put quite a damper on your community. The party is over, Mike. You, the Tims, and most of the other people on this site are going to realize that someday soon, and I hope it isn’t too late to save you from jail time.
————————
ANY WHO FLAGGED IT, BE BRAVE AND EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHY IT SHOULD BE HIDDEN. I DARE YOU.

Rest of you: since they won’t, I suggest those of us who actually believe in free speech just copy and paste these as often as necessary.

HuwOS (profile) says:

Re: Are you petty censors still trying this childish "flag" crap?

You are rather coming across as quite a long way over into deranged territory.

It is true though, people should not be flagged for spewing complete bs but the readers here are only human, not some saintly advanced species that have learnt techniques for coping with people who froth at the mouth.

Dark Helmet (profile) says:

Re: Re: Are you petty censors still trying this childish "flag" crap?

“You are rather coming across as quite a long way over into deranged territory.”

Have him link you to the Techdirt post in which he continued commenting for something like 2 months after it originally posted as his own personal memoirs. He’ll also explain how in that thread where he went on long after everyone else had gone away, he “like totally debunked everything that’s ever been said on this site and stuff”…or something. Seriously, if you want a peek into the mind of the insane, it’s worth a read.

JMT says:

Re: Are you petty censors still trying this childish "flag" crap?

“Rest of you: since they won’t, I suggest those of us who actually believe in free speech just copy and paste these as often as necessary.”

Your accusation that free speech is being stifled is somewhat undermined by the fact that everyone can clearly and easily see your crazy rantings and reply to them. Nice attempt at a comment revolution though.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Are you petty censors still trying this childish "flag" crap?

You’ve got a dichotomy of the mind. That’s holding two contradictory ideas at the same time.

You’re arguing in favour of this 3 strikes law, which would ban people from the internet, and thus, deprive them of a valuable method of free speech (to put in real world terms, if I steal a book from a bookstore, I’m not banned from reading books, just probably from that one book store).

Yet here you are about this censored comment, and promoting free speech. For what it’s worth, I do agree with you on this, comments here shouldn’t be hidden when flagged.

Ninja (profile) says:

Crap! This one is Troll paradise!!!

Mike, you are creating monsters!

As for the article itself, the numbers were actually much higher. They sent just 650k first strikes over millions of infringements they detected (I don’t have the link for the article right now but it was on TF).

After some math we found out the entirety of France would be disconnected before the next Olympic Games. French Govt is surely doing it right. But oh the disappointment, I was waiting for over a million 3 strikes by now but only 60? Come on, either Hadopi is a total fail or the French are some sloppy bastards and already moved en masse to cyberlockers, seedboxes and the likes. I’d be inclined to think it’s a mix of both if it wasn’t for the fact that the French actually put Sarkozy in the power more than once…

Anonymous Coward says:

Irrelevant

I think, in the long run, it’s kinda moot. This will only push French people to use VPNs or encrypted P2P applications (Tor, I2P, Freenet) to keep sharing data. In fact, that already happens (French IPs constitute a big part of the I2P network, for example) and with these kind of things, the tendency will be for more people to join and increase the probability of such networks reaching “critical mass”.

Annoymous says:

Huge Percentage?

Quote: “When a huge percentage of your population is accused of breaking the law”.
France (according to Wikipedia) has a total population of 65,821,885. So 650,000 is less than 1% of the total population, that is NOT a huge percentage!

There are better ways to fight for changes in the law, other than breaking it!

btrussell (profile) says:

Re: Huge Percentage?

When a law cannot be enforced, it is a useless law. This is why you just need to be accused and not convicted. When you don’t need to be convicted of a crime to be guilty, the law is already broke.

Laws are being put into place against the will of the people. Those laws deserve to be broke.

Can you provide examples of better ways?

Please keep in mind we aren’t all billionaires. Writing letters doesn’t work either, regardless of how many there are. Re:Canadian Copyright consultation.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

This is the equivalent of just saying these people are committing “theft”. Taking an actual record deprives the record store/shop owner of an actual product. Which is the legal definition of theft, “depriving someone of something”. Their is an actual loss. In no way, is your “vinyl” example relevant or comparable.

But for the sake of argument, let’s just go with your example. Those 650,000 people take a vinyl record, you can easily prove this. You either catch them in the act of the theft, or follow them after the fact (through evidence) and take them to trial for the crime, after which they can be properly punished (either through fines or jail time). Justice is done according to the law in a proper manner.

In this situation, “evidence” is laughable (AT BEST), as has been proven time and time again (printers were infringing, yeah, that right there says how reliable their methods are). 3 strikes are required to cut someone off the internet. No due process is followed. Copyright holders merely send notifications to the ISPs, who for the sake of a voluntary agreement, pass them to the customers (who may or may not have actually done anything). This is bad precedent and just bad in general. “We say you are guilty, thus you are guilty. No you cannot fight this, see evidence against you, or get any kind of due process. So it has been spoken, so it shall be.” That’s what this is, anyone who supports such actions, regardless of the reason behind them, poses more of a threat to society in general than any “thief” or “infringer”. (And I put that in ” “, because of the fact that none of these people have been proven to be guilty of anything, these are literally just baseless accusations.)

TaCktiX says:

Huge Percentage?

Noting the absurdity of a law is best done by disobeying it, from an average citizen’s perspective. You can only vote for politicians ever so often, and waiting until the next election comes up can accidentally create the impression of tacit agreement. Immediately and obviously disobeying the law while protesting its existence is a one-two punch noting its absurdity.

Leave a Reply to out_of_the_blue Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

New US Postal Service Ad Campaign: Email Sucks, So Mail Stuff Instead
Access To Italian Wikipedia Blocked In Protest Of Wiretapping Bill In Italy [Updated]
Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...